ArticleJournal of health care for the poor and underserved2013
Recruitment of black subjects for a natural history study of intracerebral hemorrhage.
Article in Journal of health care for the poor and underserved, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- High tech and high touch: Recruitment strategies for enrolling African American stroke survivors in Community Based Intervention under Nurse Guidance after stroke (CINGS) trial.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2021Article
- Building a "Deep Fund of Good Will": Reframing Research Engagement.Journal of health care for the poor and underserved · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Historically, recruitment of minority subjects for clinical research has been challenging. We developed culturally-tailored recruitment materials for a longitudinal, natural history study of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) and trained recruiting coordinators in cultural competence. Of 285 subjects meeting inclusion criteria, 158 (55% of those eligible) agreed to participate (60% of eligible Blacks vs. 45% of eligible non-Blacks, p..02). Of those enrolled, 138 (87%) agreed to participate in the genetic sub-study (86% of Blacks vs. 90% of non-Blacks enrolled, p..78). Of those subjects who refused enrollment, lack of interest in research (42%) was the most common reason given for the study as a whole. A higher rate of enrollment was achieved in Blacks vs. non-Blacks in this ICH clinical research study employing culturally tailored recruitment approaches and training of recruitment coordinators to overcome traditional recruitment barriers to research participation in minority patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.